ACIT, Rewari V. M/s. Manohar Education Society, Haryana

ITA 4170/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 53204 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-11-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 22-11-2011
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 16-09-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R S NEGI
• Assessee Lawyers: DR RAKESH GUPTA; KUNAL NAGPAL
• Keywords: Benefit of exemption
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 4170/DEL/2011 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH E NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 4170/DEL/2011 A.Y. : 2008-09 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, REWARI CIRCLE, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MODEL TOWN, REWARI VS. M/S MANOHAR EDUCATION SOCIETY, C/O CAMBRIDGE SCHOOL, GARHI BOLNI ROAD, REWARI, HARYANA (PAN : AAATM 6003F) (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) ASSEESSEE BY : DR. RAKESH GUPTA, ADV. AND SH. KUNAL NAGPAL, ADV. DEPARTMENT BY : SH. R.S. NEGI, SR. D.R. ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 13.7.2 011 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED READ AS UNDER:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN AL LOWING ITA NO. 4170/DEL/2011 2 EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C)(VI) OF IT ACT, 1961 AS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT IN THE SUPREME COURT. 2. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES FOR THE PERMISSION TO A DD, DELETE OR AMEND THE GROUND OF APPEAL BEFORE OR AT THE TIME O F HEARING OF APPEAL. 3. IN THIS CASE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEA LS) HAD HELD THAT LIMITED ISSUE FOR ADJUDICATION IS WHETHER THE SURPLUS GENERATED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C)(VI) OR NOT. HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT SINCE THE LD. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF IN COME TAX VIDE ORDER DATED 2.2.2001 GRANTED EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C)(V I) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, THE ENTIRE SURPLUS IS EXEMP TED AND THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER IS DELETED. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) CONCLUDED TH AT AS REGARDS THE OTHER ADDITION OF ` 9,55,455/-, SINCE THE ENTIR E SURPLUS IS EXEMPT AND THEREFORE, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 4. AGAINST THIS ORDER THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFO RE US. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUNSEL AND PERUSED THE R ECORDS ON THIS ISSUE. LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED A S UNDER:- THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE APPLIED FOR THE BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C)(VI) OF THE IN COME TAX ITA NO. 4170/DEL/2011 3 ACT, 1961 BEFORE THE LD. CCIT, PANCHKULA AND THE S AME WAS REJECTED VIDE ORDER DATED 26.3.2009. AGAINST THE SAID ORDER ASSESSEE WENT BEFORE THE HON BLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT SEEKING A WRIT AND THE ORDER OF THE LD. CCIT DATED 26.3.2009 WAS QUASHED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT TO BE DISPOSED OF A FRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THEREAFTER, LD. CCIT VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 2.2.2011 , GRANTED THE APPROVAL U/S. 10(23C)(VI) OF THE INCOME TAX A CT, 1961 WHICH WAS PRODUCED BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF IN COME TAX (APPEALS) AT THE TIME OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AND ON THE BASIS OF WHICH APPEAL WAS ALLOWED. AGAINST THE SAID ORDER OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT, THE DEPARTMENT HAS GONE BEFORE THE HONBLE SUPREME COUR T AS MAY BE PERUSED FROM THE DEPARTMENTS GROUNDS OF APPEAL . IN MY RESPECTFUL PRAYER, THIS NOT A VALID GROUND FOR REJECTING THE SAID EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C)(VI) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY LD. CCIT A S ON DATE. ITA NO. 4170/DEL/2011 4 THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT MAY KINDLY BE DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. 6. LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FAIRLY AGREED THA T THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE TO KEEP THE MATTER AL IVE. ACCORDINGLY, UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INF IRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). HENCE, W E UPHOLD THE SAME. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22/11/2011, UPON CONCLUSION OF HEARING. SD/- SD/- [A.D. JAIN] [A.D. JAIN] [A.D. JAIN] [A.D. JAIN] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE 22/11/2011 SRB COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: - -- - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES